Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Law
The Respective Burdens Of Proof In Title Vii Cases: Price Waterhouse V. Hopkins Confuses The Issue, Gregory T. Rossi
The Respective Burdens Of Proof In Title Vii Cases: Price Waterhouse V. Hopkins Confuses The Issue, Gregory T. Rossi
Akron Law Review
employed women, and other minorities throughout the United States. The opinion has several significant aspects. First, the case defines the respective evidentiary burdens of a plaintiff-employee and defendant-employer in a Title VIP suit, when the plaintiff-employee has shown that the defendant-employer's employment action resulted from a consideration of legitimate and illegitimate factors (i.e., "mixed motive case"). Second, the express allocation of the burdens of proof resolved a conflict among the various Courts of Appeals. Third, the Court failed to issue a majority opinion. This is significant in light of the current republican administration and its influence on what is now …
Reading Amendments And Expansions Of Title Vii Narrowly, Henry L. Chambers, Jr.
Reading Amendments And Expansions Of Title Vii Narrowly, Henry L. Chambers, Jr.
Law Faculty Publications
Throughout Title VII’s history, Congress has amended and expanded Title VII. Often, the Supreme Court has read such amendments and expansions narrowly, even as it generally reads Title VII broadly or narrowly depending on the case before it. The Court’s approach to Title VII expansions may merely indicate that the Court believes that such statutory alterations should be read only as broadly as necessary to effectuate their purposes. However, regardless of why the Court has interpreted these expansions narrowly, that the Court has done so suggests that Congress ought to consider carefully how it amends or expands Title VII in …